About your Search

20121204
20121204
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7
spending. he went from 70% support down to below 50% and lost the house. now he gets re-elected with less strength, not against a war hero but a guy from massachusetts, and the republicans have the house and he thinks somebody made him king and he's going to have more taxes, more spending, and more regulations. it's a real problem for him. he doesn't have the mandate he thinks he does. so i think he takes us over the cliff because he doesn't -- he's got blinders on. he doesn't see where he stands in the universe. >> okay. there are a couple things to unpack here. i want to go back to this question -- i think what i'm confused about is this kind of game of smoke and mirrors that seems to be playing out on the right. and i ask you again, is closing a loophole and ending a deduction the same thing as raising taxes? >> you have to look at the whole package. i mean i would think if you're going to -- and the other key thing here is, anybody -- >> is that a no? >> you have to -- first you have to look at the whole package and find out what's in it. to sit here and shoot at negotiating strategie
since the election and the fiscal cliff face off. he reiterated that lying in the sand is higher taxes for the wealthy. he gave republicans some room to maneuver. >> the issue right now that's relevant is the acknowledgment that if we're going to raise revenues that are sufficient to balance with the very tough cuts that we've already made and the further reforms and entitlemented ientitlements i'm prepared to make, we have to see the rates on the top 2% go up. we're not getting a deal without it. understand the reason for that. it's not me being stubborn or partisan, it's a matter of math. >> and the gop plan, which was unveiled yesterday, includes $800 bill onin new taxes made through closing loopholes and deductions and not raising rates. compare that to the president's plan and that's about half of what the white house asked for. republicans propose 600 billion in entitlement saving including raising the medicare requirement to 67, nearly twice what the white house called for. the gop plan changes how social security benefits are calculated, something addressed under the president'
of the election. issues like entitlement reform and new revenue, but he's going to have to do something big. there's been a four-year course of he doesn't get along with either party, doesn't make the kind of effort you're talking about. i don't think there's any doubt he's going to, particularly john boehner, find some human interconnection moment that says we're doing this. and that's when the tough part starts. because once there's a leader deal, getting it through the house, whatever the terms of it is going to be super hard. >> i was with a group of businessmen last night, and their question was, why don't the people in washington do what we do when there's an important decision that comes up? why don't they get into a room and hammer it out, get some food, drinks, whether it's a couple days, get them helicopters, and go to camp david. you get in a room together -- >> the president -- the president doesn't like doing that. he's not comfortable doing that. and jon meacham, that is not the opinion of a pundit, that is a matter of historical record for his first four years. is it not? >> that's
can get this sorted out, you can really move forward, and therefore, i think now that your elections are out of the way, i'm just speaking as an outsider, now your election is out of the way, there's going to be all this bargaining and positions, but my expectations, i hope, and the desire of the world, is sorted out, and we can move on, and then sort our own problems out. >> for those of us in the united states, we see sort of what seems to be two intractable issues. republicans saying we will not raise taxes on the top 2% of earners. the democrats say we're certainly not going to have cuts that hurt spending cuts that hurt the middle class. and as the proposals go on the table they seem intractable on it. >> they do. but you would expect them, the republicans to be more on the tax side and democrats to be more on the we're not cutting spending side. this is pretty routine type of argument. the question is, you know, are they so far apart they can't bridge the gap? i think they could bridge the gap. you know, there have been proposals put forward on a cross-party basis before that v
johns, hitting back. pizza chain's favorability score dropped from 32 on election day to 4 at the end of last month. 40 is the top score. papa john's released a statement saying the results are contradictory to another study by the same company showing significant reputation gains. that statement also says the ceo made, his remarks on the affordable care act were mischaracterized in the media. that mischaracterization didn't seem to have had an effect on the brand. >>> new jersey governor chris christie isn't shy about asking the federal government for money. he wants fema to reimburse the state for 100% of its emergency costs following superstorm sandy. the total? nearly $40 billion. >>> we've heard the controversy surrounding the food stamp program. another politician is taking the challenge to see what it's like for other people who rely on it. newark mayor cory booker is pledging to live off food stamps for one week, joining other celebrities like mario batali, colorado governor john hickenlooper, philadelphia mayor michael nutter and representative robert brady. joining me now is
. rick warren tweeted this. susan rice's appalling words when she put election politics ahead of stopping the genocide in rwanda. before that tweet was delete ed -- a 2002 article that claims she said this. if we use the word genocide and are seen as doing nothing, what will be the effect on the november election? elyse, does the criticism against rice add up do you think? >> i don't think 100%. susan rice was director for u.n. affairs at the national security counsel at the time of the genocide. the rwanda genocide. now, that office dealt more with the united nations than with africa, even though the united nations was dealing with the issue. at the time, it was a working level staff position. her first in government. ambassador rice could make announcements, but wouldn't be involved in making such an important decision about getting involved militarily in rwanda and president clinton said he made the decision. it was the greatest mistake of his presidency. and susan rice traveled to rwanda shortly after the genocide and said seeing the horrors of rwanda, the ground littered with hundred
. susan rice's appalling words when she put election politics ahead of stopping the again side in rwanda. before that tweet was deleted. a 2002 article claims rice said this. if we use the word again side and are seen as doing nothing, what will be the effect on the november congressional election? our foreign affairs reporter is out front tonight. elise, does the criticism against rice add up, do you think? >> i don't think 100%, soledad. susan rice was director for u.n. affairs at the national security council at the time of the again side, the rwanda again side. that office dealt more with the united nations than with africa, even though the united nations was dealing with the issue. at the time it was a working level staff position. her first in government, ambassador rice could make announcements at that level, but wouldn't be involved making an important decision getting involved militarily in rwanda. president clinton said he made the decision, it was the greatest mistake of his presidency, and ambassador rice travelled to rwanda after the again side. she said seeing the ground li
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7